Hi,
I wanted to know what people think about the fact that Vista was the first MS OS that reports back to MS as to the status of its activation. Do you trust this MS OS with this back communication to MS servers?

I mean this is similar to Trojan programs that report back to their authors, and in it the author suspects that all users are thiefs, and they should be checked in a meticulous way programmatically.

Why was it acceptable to basically put "activation back-door", into vista?

How do I know that its only sending back activation data, and not other data, like browsing behaviors and others.

Its the first time since Win 98, and Xp, where a system would meticulously check and check and check , and report back periodically if vista is not stolen system.

Why Is Vista generating these Massive (I mean > Gbs) of data?

Is trust breaking between MS and its customers? Or what is the deal?

// I am sure people are going to say I am paranoid, but I just want to know views on the matter of software reporting back to its authors and not in a
transparent way.

Yes they have a privacy policy and a legal department to make sure its followed. I honestly couldn't care less.

You gotta remember that activation and WGA and the like isn't about stopping software pirates per se. It's about making people aware of pirated software. Often its the case that people buy a computer from some shady store or ebay, which contains a pirated
copy of Windows. These sort of technologies make the customer aware of crappy business practices, as opposed to the past where they'd been unaware that their purchase contains stolen software.

and i especially didnt like the inference that if you buy ( or get) vista Ult
full version and office - full version - that you can only load it one machine.

that is ridiculous. you are buying it to use as a human. so you can load it at home, on laptop - or if need be - even at work.

I am AWARE the licence says otherwise... but they havent stopped this yet... waiting with baited breath probably... so make sure you use it

this all = trust.

activate...now validate.. = trust?

multiple security messages - that might as well say "you absolve us from all blame: continue" = trust?

in 10 minutes an email could be written by the brass - that would let us and media companies no where ms now stands... but ..no email yet... basically - its what they can get away with - will be the new rules.

ya thats trust. thats working for customers, consumers and developers..

bah

im actually all happy with new faster machines due to vista. but the question here is trust - and - no - i do not at all trust vista (but i trusted XP - pre- sp2 and earlier) bla bla

Yes they have a privacy policy and a legal department to make sure its followed. I honestly couldn't care less.

You gotta remember that activation and WGA and the like isn't about stopping software pirates per se. It's about making people aware of pirated software. Often its the case that people buy a computer from some shady store or ebay, which contains a pirated
copy of Windows. These sort of technologies make the customer aware of crappy business practices, as opposed to the past where they'd been unaware that their purchase contains stolen software.

Well, give people the choice to opt-out, from such thing. Some people might not want this warnings as you say.

Secondly, alot of companies have privacy policies, it does not mean that some bits of very private information would get sent to some backend database without the user knowing about it.

As for me, I am beginning to not like Vista, to me its weird.

I mean its okay, that an OS would connect , Once, to the MS server to activate itself, but then that is it. Why keep doing it every 180 days?

The thing is, it feels like your working on a Trojan OS, that is constantly shipping "encrypted blobs of data" to some MS backend database.

Things did not used to be that way before. Things were simple.

I mean security can be achieved without all this back reporting.

To me it seems that MS is trying to protect me from hackers, but at the same time installing their own "backdoor".

and i especially didnt like the inference that if you buy ( or get) vista Ult
full version and office - full version - that you can only load it one machine.

that is ridiculous. you are buying it to use as a human. so you can load it at home, on laptop - or if need be - even at work.

I am AWARE the licence says otherwise... but they havent stopped this yet... waiting with baited breath probably... so make sure you use it

this all = trust.

activate...now validate.. = trust?

multiple security messages - that might as well say "you absolve us from all blame: continue" = trust?

in 10 minutes an email could be written by the brass - that would let us and media companies no where ms now stands... but ..no email yet... basically - its what they can get away with - will be the new rules.

ya thats trust. thats working for customers, consumers and developers..

bah

im actually all happy with new faster machines due to vista. but the question here is trust - and - no - i do not at all trust vista (but i trusted XP - pre- sp2 and earlier) bla bla

Yes, I agree. I liked XP because things were simple. You understand what is going on. Now not so much.

Maybe the trust between MS and its customer base is fading away?

Its similar to this: you buy a car , where the dealer has installed a GPS locator to know at all times where the car is? Even though they have privacy policies, it becomes uncomfortable.

id say you cant answer the question posed - without first answering - do you trust ms

and if you do - with your privacy

(i actually probably trust them more with internet privacy - than computer privacy)

just tired of the old school - we'll make computers into tvsets that are vending machines

the internet is the tv set - its open.. all ms actions point to what they can get away with... not ONE example of helping us.. just seeing what - we will put up with

trust... right.

ps - in the "old days" ms was the google... ms was the one saying - guess what - this is free now. guess what - now you dont have to worry about that anymore. guess what - we bought them - and put it in - so you dont need to go get it anymore.

those days were cool

now its- here's a new ____ it has ... a feature! its 300$ activate, then validate to use it.. and let us use your bandwidth to do some ... stuff

I can understand why some people wouldn't trust Microsoft, but personally I trust them and dont have a problem with them storing my private info. They have a good privacy policy and if they screwed up even a little they'd be getting sued left and right
so they have good incentive keep my private data private and not abuse it.

The thing is this isn't just a Microsoft issue, this issue is industry wide. Every computer game I've bought in the last six months phones home every time I start it up. When my Internet is down I have one or two games that refuse to even start because they
cant connect to a validation server.

Yes they have a privacy policy and a legal department to make sure its followed. I honestly couldn't care less.

You gotta remember that activation and WGA and the like isn't about stopping software pirates per se. It's about making people aware of pirated software. Often its the case that people buy a computer from some shady store or ebay, which contains a pirated
copy of Windows. These sort of technologies make the customer aware of crappy business practices, as opposed to the past where they'd been unaware that their purchase contains stolen software.

BS. If activation wan't about stopping software pirates and was there only to make users aware of pirated software, then it would behave differently. I have to reactivate if I change my hardware? How does that have anything to do with making me aware of
whether or not I have pirated software? Is Vista suddenly pirated after I've added a secondary drive? Why was Vista "crippled" for people when the servers failed a while back, AFTER they'd already been activated once. Did all of those Vista installations
suddenly become pirated just because some servers in Microsoft's farms went down?

No, this is all about stopping pirates. Which it fails to do. But does cause grief for legitimate users. Our industry MUST learn that these practices are harmful to customers and shouldn't be done.

I trust MS as much as I trust any other company with my personal data... i.e. not much, and I only give them the minimum necessary.

When it's clearly just for marketing data I tend to give honest answers to everything except the name and address fields... I always wondered how many people used the same answers as me.

It's not that I expect them to do anything evil with my personal data, it's more that I expect them to do something annoying with it... Like contacting me about stuff I don't really want, or worse, mis-reading usage stats and delivering stupid features to solve
problem X when if they solved problem Y I'd never need to go near problem X in the first place.

Sure, I trust ms with the personal information I have given to them. First: It’s psychological though. generally im a very trusting person, I think in general im a trust worthy person my self so most
the time I trust in accordance with how much im trusted or how much I think some one can trust me. Secondly though I gage trust level on how parties have treated me in the past and if they have a track record of being trust worthy. Ether it be a corporation
or a person or some other entity